Santa Anita Morning Line

[Dark Horse]

As soon as the tote board starts flashing there's an immediate drop into the range where the public would expect the lines to be. So the tote board, i.e. the way it is programmed, instantly disregards White's lazy figures. That's the funny part.

[elhelmete]

Originally Posted by Dark Horse

As soon as the tote board starts flashing there's an immediate drop into the range where the public would expect the lines to be. So the tote board, i.e. the way it is programmed, instantly disregards White's lazy figures. That's the funny part.

Yes and we all know first flash odds never change in 20 minutes.

[Dark Horse]

If it bothers you, you can always do what the tote board does and use a different calibration. If you want the odds to add up to 120%, or to 100%, you can easily do so in Excel. You should probably do that anyway, if you want to see the overlays regardless of what the total odds add up to. Instead of fractions, use 300 for 3/1, 60 for 3/5, etc.

[Dark Horse]

Originally Posted by elhelmete

Yes and we all know first flash odds never change in 20 minutes.

Some things change fast. Some things last a lifetime.

[Track Phantom]

Honest Question:

Is Jon White required to select the favorite as his selection to win each race? (He does both print and audio in the paddock and has his top 4 selections per race).

Also, is Jon White required to select the morning line favorite based on who he thinks will win the race?

The reason I ask is the following statistic:
Through the first 85 races of the meet, Jon White has selected the morning line favorite to win 82 times (96%). The 3 times he didn't select the favorite, he chose the 2nd favorite to win.

None of this is logical. He can't (or I hope he can't) believe the favorite is going to win every race. I would think he would have more to offer than that. However, he shouldn't be creating a morning line based on who he thinks is going to win the race.

He should be handicapping the public when creating morning lines and handicapping the race, and horses, to determine his top selection.

What am I missing here?

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by Valento

Honest Question:

Is Jon White required to select the favorite as his selection to win each race? (He does both print and audio in the paddock and has his top 4 selections per race).

Also, is Jon White required to select the morning line favorite based on who he thinks will win the race?

The reason I ask is the following statistic:
Through the first 85 races of the meet, Jon White has selected the morning line favorite to win 82 times (96%). The 3 times he didn't select the favorite, he chose the 2nd favorite to win.

None of this is logical. He can't (or I hope he can't) believe the favorite is going to win every race. I would think he would have more to offer than that. However, he shouldn't be creating a morning line based on who he thinks is going to win the race.

He should be handicapping the public when creating morning lines and handicapping the race, and horses, to determine his top selection.

What am I missing here?

Maybe he feels if he doesn't pick the favorite or the 2nd choice, he's insulting the connections of those runners.

Its better off not releasing any picks at all if the picks are going to be that of either a simpleton or someone with such strong biases than he can't be objective.

Its fine to not be objective, just don't pretend to be.

[Greyfox]

Originally Posted by Valento

Again, I'm not a morning line maker but I was always taught that the ML is supposed to reflect the public.

That's my understanding of the Morning Line maker's role too.

[Track Phantom]

Originally Posted by Valento

Honest Question:

Is Jon White required to select the favorite as his selection to win each race? (He does both print and audio in the paddock and has his top 4 selections per race).

Also, is Jon White required to select the morning line favorite based on who he thinks will win the race?

The reason I ask is the following statistic:
Through the first 85 races of the meet, Jon White has selected the morning line favorite to win 82 times (96%). The 3 times he didn't select the favorite, he chose the 2nd favorite to win.

None of this is logical. He can't (or I hope he can't) believe the favorite is going to win every race. I would think he would have more to offer than that. However, he shouldn't be creating a morning line based on who he thinks is going to win the race.

He should be handicapping the public when creating morning lines and handicapping the race, and horses, to determine his top selection.

What am I missing here?

I honestly want to know the rationale here. I sent him a message on Twitter but he won't respond. No accountability. No drive for excellence. No need to answer to anyone. Just do whatever....

This makes me appreciate what kind of presentation and product that is put on in NY.

[Dark Horse]

With the exception of Michelle Yu, the prerace comments in Southern Cal are terrible. White is merely explaining his morning lines. Possibly the biggest joker is Quigley, who's favorite selection by far is the all-button. You're exactly right. Other than Yu, there's zero drive for excellence. It doesn't really matter to me, because I find all prerace chatter distracting. I have it on only to be informed of last minute changes or delays.

[Ocala Mike]

Time to rehash what I've posted before about the M/L, NYRA style.

What I was told by two different NYRA M/L makers back in the late 70's/early 80's (B.J. O'Neill/Donald LaPlace) when I worked in the calculating room is that the M/L is a HYBRID combining a prediction of what the public will do with a little bit of linemaker preference.

B. J., for example, was a crusty old Damon Runyon-type character who made the line with the best of them. He used to gloat when a horse he made, say, 4-1, won and paid $17.00 (kind of an "I told you so" moment-in other words, the public was WRONG and he was RIGHT!). Donald was more inclined to try to be a barometer for the public; I remember listening in on telecons he would have with trainers who thought he made their horses too low or high in the line.

One thing reains true about NYRA: the M/L guy is not some flunkie that they pulled off the mutuel line, but a knowledgable racing guy. You will, by the way, never see on a NYRA program a listing called "M/L Selections"; they've got Beyer, Blewitt, and Beer to do that.

[mountainman]

Originally Posted by Ocala Mike

Time to rehash what I've posted before about the M/L, NYRA style.

What I was told by two different NYRA M/L makers back in the late 70's/early 80's (B.J. O'Neill/Donald LaPlace) when I worked in the calculating room is that the M/L is a HYBRID combining a prediction of what the public will do with a little bit of linemaker preference.

B. J., for example, was a crusty old Damon Runyon-type character who made the line with the best of them. He used to gloat when a horse he made, say, 4-1, won and paid $17.00 (kind of an "I told you so" moment-in other words, the public was WRONG and he was RIGHT!). Donald was more inclined to try to be a barometer for the public; I remember listening in on telecons he would have with trainers who thought he made their horses too low or high in the line.

One thing reains true about NYRA: the M/L guy is not some flunkie that they pulled off the mutuel line, but a knowledgable racing guy. You will, by the way, never see on a NYRA program a listing called "M/L Selections"; they've got Beyer, Blewitt, and Beer to do that.

In the aftermath of a given race, it's only human for a ML maker to try and have it both ways. For instance, if a 7/2 that I had pegged at 2-1 scores, I'm quick (in private conversations with Nancy or Joe) to castigate the public for it's "failure to see my wisdom." However, if a chalk I'd correctly lined at 2-1 runs up the track, I focus afterward on having accurately predicted the odds. Human ego and self-serving spin.

But make no mistake, a track odds-maker's ONLY task is to predict how the public will wager. Period.

Incidentally, it just KILLS me to have a live horse in mind for a few weeks, but then admit to myself that its attributes aren't quite as subtle as I'd prefer to believe, and then set the odds accordingly for the track program. Just KILLS me.

[davew]

Originally Posted by Dark Horse

As soon as the tote board starts flashing there's an immediate drop into the range where the public would expect the lines to be. So the tote board, i.e. the way it is programmed, instantly disregards White's lazy figures. That's the funny part.

The odds are calculated from the amount in the win pool as if the pool was closed and race ran.

[Robert Fischer]

Anybody that doesn't know - "Mountainman" Mark is the morning line maker and track handicapper for Mountaineer.

He's one of the best around (i'm not bullshitting or sugar coating).

He's also HONEST almost to a fault.

Trust that he sees some of those "subtle" live entries, and I've never seen him set the morning line odds higher, at the expense of the public, for his own gain. Rather the opposite.

I'm not huge into watching handicapping shows and morning lines, so i can't claim that this is all-inclusive, -but New York and Mountaineer are the only 2 I can think of off the top, where I respect the broadcast on my level of play. Both do a professional job, and are informative for both the casual public and the serious player.

Originally Posted by mountainman

In the aftermath of a given race, it's only human for a ML maker to try and have it both ways. For instance, if a 7/2 that I had pegged at 2-1 scores, I'm quick (in private conversations with Nancy or Joe) to castigate the public for it's "failure to see my wisdom." However, if a chalk I'd correctly lined at 2-1 runs up the track, I focus afterward on having accurately predicted the odds. Human ego and self-serving spin.

But make no mistake, a track odds-maker's ONLY task is to predict how the public will wager. Period.

Incidentally, it just KILLS me to have a live horse in mind for a few weeks, but then admit to myself that its attributes aren't quite as subtle as I'd prefer to believe, and then set the odds accordingly for the track program. Just KILLS me.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

Anybody that doesn't know - "Mountainman" Mark is the morning line maker and track handicapper for Mountaineer.

He's one of the best around (i'm not bullshitting or sugar coating).

He's also HONEST almost to a fault.

Trust that he sees some of those "subtle" live entries, and I've never seen him set the morning line odds higher, at the expense of the public, for his own gain. Rather the opposite.

I'm not huge into watching handicapping shows and morning lines, so i can't claim that this is all-inclusive, -but New York and Mountaineer are the only 2 I can think of off the top, where I respect the broadcast on my level of play. Both do a professional job, and are informative for both the casual public and the serious player.

Love Mark. True, if you're playing the mountain, you can't have them on mute.

[Robert Fischer]

How about today with Hoppertunity at Santa Anita?


Purely sticking with the thread's idea - I'd say "this idiot set the morning line @ 9-5, on an OBVIOUS even money shot?? ****ing terrible. Incompetent even."

I think everybody knows that was a horse with an expected off-odds at around Even Money.

However, it's also worth questioning whether a misleading morning line of "9/5" for the fan-favorite horse running in the feature race will attract more money and more public players, than an accurate morning line of "Even Money".

Commitment is certainly a strong psychological motivator, and if the track believes that by misrepresenting the probable odds of a horse like Hoppertunity, it will get more players to commit to the race, then it's a good business move for them.